About your Search

20120926
20121004
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
't to be. bill clinton butchers of beijing. he ends up forging a pretty strong relationship with china. so i think you have to discount a lot of the rhetoric and a lot of what you hear about, about priorities at this point. and probably conclude that when they do get in office that the harold macmillan words will probably drive things more than anything else. and that's defense, my dear boy, events. and then we get back to what you are saying. what will be their management style? what will be their ability a stunt history to respond to those events as they arise. spoonbill, what leadership is have you picked up? >> i think we have an incumbent president so presumably we know how he will be inclined to cover but i suppose one could argue that maybe not becoming, obama took over and over nine in a very unusual circumstance, huge majority in both houses, wind at his back but also apparently failed administration, huge financial crisis. he did various things we could second guess them or not, but rahm emanuel is as chief of staff, they're presumably because he understood how to manage congress
to including bill clinton obviously who took military action in kosovo in that case without a u.n. security council mandate and, barack obama ran and says repeatedly that he does not consider the united states bound by to pursue its interests bound by u.n. security council resolutions. merge has i would say am by lept attitude toward international law. we are in some respects the greatest spokesman sometimes for international law but throughout our history and throughout the cold war and even from the fact that we founded the united nations we have been, among the most persistent ignorers of international law at the same time. so you know, it's always this, and partly because we have this exceptional view that the laws are right for everybody but they're not always right for us because we have a special role to play in the world. >> is it serially bad thing that is damaging to our status and credibility in the international community? >> well, it seems to me if you tried to say it in one sentence what the u.s. goal ought to be, it ought to be to create a world order that we would like, if w
bill clinton gave a talk at the democratic national convention to was incredibly shrewd because he didn't talk about medicare they talk about medicare it's a real wedge into the numbers between the two campaigns. a really is medicaid and it's a lot of white working-class folks as well as the underrepresented minority backgrounds as well. so, i think that when you think about how the republicans need to talk of it, i think that is the funny thing about crime -- ryan. he has in some respects gotten a right and toxin at how we actually care about the safety net. it matters a lot to us in the free enterprise society and a dynamic society we need to have it so it is not some kind of a side thing that we have a garnish on the soudet, that kind of an incredibly important part of making the whole system work. the problem is that, you know, the reason why he excites a lot of activists is for other reasons, the way in which he sometimes uses the very apocalyptic language about the threat to the free enterprise and what have you come and i think that is one reason why the governors have a big adva
budget, a point bill clinton made rather effectively in a speech at the democratic national convention. they argued those savings to reforming medicare am not defining a new entitled. that's a very important difference. both parties agreed controls on the medicare spending but they disagree over the best path forward. this is a claim by the republicans i have given two pinocchios. meanwhile, obama claims that paul ryan's plan for medicare would force seniors to pay $6400 more a year to make up for cuts in the program. this is an old democratic attack line. it's been around for a look at the bottom is it's based on an earlier version of ryan's plan. another thing i've given two pinocchios. people should always be wary of dire predictions far off any future. the city $400 figure refers to an analysis of the cbo as that of a different less generous ryan plan. goes all the way to year 2022, the cbo made no estimates of the new version except to say that beneficiaries might face higher costs. the new ryan plan was changed in other ways that would change the option of traditional medicare. h
parties are getting in the way. ronald reagan could work with tip o'neill. bill clinton could work with newt gingrich. we have to get back to that context when it is not about political party but taking care of people and moving forward. leadership is not about blame. it is the house's fall for the president's fault. leadership is about rolling up your sleeves and locking yourself in a room and leading by example. congress has not been able to come of with a budget in 2,000 days. that is ridiculous. let's come up with a budget. there is legislation that is bipartisan. no budget no pay legislation says if congress doesn't do its job and have a responsible budget they don't get paid. that is a step in the right direction. my pledge is i will co-sponsor that legislation which is bipartisan and holds congress accountable for doing with their job which is passing a budget and they haven't done it in 2,000 days. has the no budget no pay legislation. >> the question is about compromise. give us another ec would be willing to compromise on. bera: there are many of us who thing no child lef
it with welfare benefits however this time abacus joined by governors congress and the clinton administration agreed that a significant infusion of new childcare funds were necessary if low-income women were going to face increase work requirements. this led to a second version of the senate bill that included a 4 billion-dollar increase in childcare funds over five years. the tanf bill included a provision that allowed some tanf funding to be transferred to ccpg. it was absolutely clear in that debate that most of the low-income women expected to work were not going going to earn enough to pay for childcare. this is still true. the battle over quality was eliminated. the governors leading the welfare discussion and many republicans in in the house wanted to completely eliminate the minimum standards in the quality set aside. after a long fight we wanted bipartisan support. maintain both that we lost the requirement in the market rate. there was no meaningful discussion of improvement over those two years. with these new funds in additional funding later in the clinton administration states
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)